Editorial: District court judges need to be lawyers

Published: Friday, April 5, 2013 at 11:29 AM.

Many of us possess the arrogance to believe we can do other people’s jobs better than they can.

How many times have we looked at someone such as a major league baseball umpire or an award-winning chef and said: “I bet I could do that job just as well as that person.”

Of course, it’s not true. While not all jobs require professional training, true professionals have that designation because they can do things other people can’t do.

It’s why the term “professional politician” is not a compliment. Being a politician should not be a profession and most certainly does not require any great skills or knowledge beyond getting elected.

Speaker of the N.C. House Thom Tillis understands this. Tillis has reminded his members that they didn’t become experts in anything just because they were elected to the legislature. His point is that legislators should rely on the true professionals in various fields to help guide policy.

Many of us possess the arrogance to believe we can do other people’s jobs better than they can.

How many times have we looked at someone such as a major league baseball umpire or an award-winning chef and said: “I bet I could do that job just as well as that person.”

Of course, it’s not true. While not all jobs require professional training, true professionals have that designation because they can do things other people can’t do.

It’s why the term “professional politician” is not a compliment. Being a politician should not be a profession and most certainly does not require any great skills or knowledge beyond getting elected.

Speaker of the N.C. House Thom Tillis understands this. Tillis has reminded his members that they didn’t become experts in anything just because they were elected to the legislature. His point is that legislators should rely on the true professionals in various fields to help guide policy.

These four Republicans are sponsors of House Bill 397. This bill would rewrite the state’s constitution regarding eligibility to be a district court judge. Right now, the only requirement to be appointed or elected a district court judge is to be a licensed attorney.

But HB 397 would amend the constitution thusly: “Constitutional amendment to allow persons to serve as district court judges if they have 10 years of experience as a sheriff, clerk of superior court or magistrate, or 25 years of experience as a certified law enforcement officer.”

The arrogance of the bill is alarming.

We understand there is frustration on the left and the right with the judiciary. But this aggravation stems mainly from appellate courts, where the highest friction between the legislative and judicial branches exist. It is here where legislation either survives or is struck down.

In state district court, that kind of turf is rarely traveled upon. Instead, judges are using countless specific areas of the statutes to determine, for example, if a young child should remain in the custody of his drug-addicted father or his prostitute mother.

Fortunately, we are confident that most of those serving in law enforcement, clerks offices and as magistrates wouldn’t want to preside over the kinds of cases heard in district court.

Make no mistake, there are many examples of government licensure run amok — often it’s trade organizations using the government to freeze out competitors.

But when it comes to those making the kind of decisions required in district court, having licensed attorney makes perfect sense.